Did the U.S. Just Hand its AI Edge to China?

Summary

---

Prof G Markets – "Did the U.S. Just Hand its AI Edge to China?"

Date: December 10, 2025
Hosts: Ed Elson
Guests: Chris McGuire (Senior Fellow, China & Emerging Technologies, Council on Foreign Relations), Alex Heath (Sources newsletter, Access podcast)

---

Episode Overview

This episode tackles two major tech stories shaking the markets:

1. U.S. AI chip export policy flip-flops and its implications for global AI competition with China
2. Google’s revival of smart glasses, betting on AI to reshape personal tech

The hosts scrutinize the U.S. government's abrupt reversal allowing Nvidia’s advanced H200 AI chips to be sold to China—and what it means for America’s technological lead over its chief rival. Later, the episode examines Google's renewed push into smart glasses, what makes this iteration different, and whether these wearables are on the verge of mainstream adoption.

---

Segment 1: Market Update & SpaceX IPO News

[01:56–02:34]

• Broad Market Pulse:
  • Major indices flat ahead of a key Federal Reserve interest rate decision.
  • Russell 2000 hits all-time high, 10-year Treasury yields and the dollar stable, Bitcoin rises.
• SpaceX IPO in 2026:
  • Expected: Over $30 billion, potentially largest listing ever.

---

Segment 2: U.S. Greenlights Advanced AI Chip Sales to China

[02:34–13:10]
Guest: Chris McGuire (Council on Foreign Relations)
Key Q&A, Timeline, and Insights

The Shifting Timeline

[03:29–05:57]

• Initial Export Controls:
  • Began October 2022 to prevent China from accessing advanced U.S. AI chips (A100-level and above).
  • Goal: Maintain significant U.S. technological lead, especially in hardware.
  • Two-pronged strategy: Slow China’s progress; invest at home.
• Policy Back-and-Forths:
  • Loopholes allowed Nvidia to skirt restrictions with modified chips (H20).
  • Under Trump administration: Brief shut-out, then allowance of even more advanced H200 chip sales.
  • H200's Significance:
    • "It's six times better than the H20. It's nine times over the export control limits." (Chris McGuire, [05:16])
    • First time genuinely state-of-the-art chips exported beyond original control intent.

Why So Many Policy Reversals?

[05:57–08:22]

• Underlying rationale:
  • The U.S. had only one real, major AI advantage over China: cutting-edge hardware (chips).
  • Nvidia’s lobbying—especially by CEO Jensen Huang—played a crucial role.
  • Market logic vs. national security: Nvidia wants broader market (esp. China), but U.S. risked aiding China's military/espionage AI efforts.
  • "President Trump is basically saying, whatever is good for Nvidia is good for America." (Chris McGuire, [08:13])

What Changed—Policy by Personality?

[08:22–10:49]

• Personal relationships may have driven the decision:
  • "I think the answer to why this happened is it came down to personal relationships. And I think Jensen Huang has convinced the President that this is a good thing." (Chris McGuire, [09:10])
• Arguments for exporting:
  • Some claim China will get chips from other sources (Huawei, etc.) or become "addicted" to U.S. supply.
  • McGuire counters: Huawei can't match Nvidia’s performance; China aims aggressively for internal supply, never content with dependency.

China’s Response: Restricting H200 Imports

[10:49–12:53]

• Chinese Self-restriction:
  • Beijing acts to block large-scale purchase of H200 chips, possibly as negotiation or to support domestic industry.
• Strategic Play:
  • "China will make sure those [domestic] chips get sold... manipulate their domestic market... That will be the case no matter how many chips they make." (Chris McGuire, [12:25])
• Skepticism:
  • McGuire doubts China would genuinely pass on a "substantial plus up in compute capability."

Memorable Quote:

"Personally, I think Nvidia is a fantastic company... but I think that probably wouldn't make as blanket a statement" (Chris McGuire, [08:16]).

Takeaways:

• The chip export policy is now seemingly motivated by corporate interests and high-level relationships, not national security.
• The U.S. may be sacrificing its last clear advantage in the AI race—chip dominance—for short-term business gains.

---

Segment 3: Google’s Smart Glasses — The AI Wearables Resurgence

[16:01–26:39]
Guest: Alex Heath (Tech Journalist)

Why Smart Glasses, and Why Now?

[16:52–18:36]

• Google Glass: From Flop to Second Act
  • "The short answer is AI... build Google for your face, which honestly is a pretty compelling idea." (Alex Heath, [17:10])
  • AI ("Gemini") enables context-aware, heads-up computing—now entwined with daily Google product ecosystem.
• Social Acceptance:
  • Society has become more accepting of AI and wearable tech (inspired by Meta's Ray-Ban smart glasses' traction).

Product Details & Competitive Landscape

[18:43–19:48]

• Google’s approach is platform-driven, partnering with Warby Parker, Gentle Monster (Asia), and Samsung for hardware.
• Not clear if it will be branded "Glass"; expects both first-party (Pixel-style) and widespread OEM offerings.
• "They really want this platform, this Gemini AR software platform, to be the bet and to be everywhere, which is a real assault on Meta's strategy." (Alex Heath, [19:23])

Are Wearables Ready for the Masses? Why Did Wall Street Shrug?

[20:26–23:33]

• Most prior tech flops were about user unwillingness to wear "ugly" hardware.
• Meta's Ray-Ban collab cracked the code: wearables must look like normal glasses.
• Warby Parker’s stock up 24% on partnership news, but Heath says this is overreaction: "That announcement does not warrant a 24% jump in Warby Parker stock. ... It's ridiculous." (Alex Heath, [23:16])

The Big Question: Are AI Glasses the Real Future?

[23:33–25:37]

• Heath describes "aha" moments with Meta prototypes: "When you see the interaction modality... it's just obvious, man, that this is where it's going because it's just so much more natural." ([24:23])
• Predicts mainstream adoption is a matter of iteration, not fundamental tech breakthroughs.
• But: "The phone is safe. It's never going to go away... But I do think it's inevitable just because of the natural use of it." ([25:15])

Apple’s Position

[25:37–26:28]

• Apple is developing glasses (expected around 2027–28). Recent design head defection to Meta may signal internal doubt or delays.

---

Segment 4: OnlyFans as a Societal Mirror

[26:44–31:53]

Key Stats and Reflection

• American spending on OnlyFans in 2025: $2.6 billion
  • "That's more money than this nation spends on socks or toothpaste or phone chargers." (Ed Elson, [27:26])
  • "It's about as close to the downfall of society as we're going to get." ([31:17])
• Core Insight:
  • OnlyFans isn't just about erotic content; it's about monetized fake relationships—a "window into what is actually happening at the societal level."
• Problem Highlighted:
  • Points to a growing epidemic of loneliness and emotional emptiness among young men, fueling the platform’s rise.

Memorable Quote:

"It's literally a business. Now. It's something close to prostitution, but not quite, because it's also scratching this emotional itch... this is how bad the loneliness problem has gotten. It has literally become a multi billion dollar industry and it is ruining the lives of young men literally by the millions." (Ed Elson, [29:23])

---

Timestamps of Key Segments

| Segment | Topic/Quote Highlight | Timestamp | |-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------| | Intro & Markets | SpaceX IPO, market flatness, Russell 2000 high | 01:56–02:34 | | AI Chip Export News | "Nvidia can now sell H200 chips to China..." | 02:34 | | Chip Export Timeline | Chris McGuire breaks down U.S.-China chip control history | 04:02–05:57 | | "Why" Behind Policy | "President Trump is basically saying, whatever is good for Nvidia is good for America." | 08:13 | | China’s Response | Beijing limits H200 chip imports | 10:49–12:53 | | Google Smart Glasses | "The short answer is AI... Google for your face..." | 17:10 | | Market Skepticism | "That does not warrant a 24% jump in Warby Parker stock..." | 23:16 | | The Wearable Future | "It's just obvious, man, that this is where it's going..." | 24:23 | | OnlyFans Data | "$2.6 billion spent by Americans in 2025..." | 27:26 | | Societal Reflection | "If that doesn't tell us what is wrong with our society right now, I don't know what does." | 28:21 |

---

Notable Quotes

• Chris McGuire on U.S. Policy Shift:
  "This is the first time that we're really exporting AI chips that are, that are far greater than the intent of the controls." ([05:27])

• On National Security Motivation:
  "President Trump is basically saying, whatever is good for Nvidia is good for America." (Chris McGuire, [08:13])

• On AI Glasses’ Appeal:
  "It's just obvious, man, that this is where it's going because it's just so much more natural." (Alex Heath, [24:23])

• On OnlyFans as a Societal Barometer:
  "Money talks for itself. It isn't biased, it's neutral. It is a true reflection of who we are, what we care about and what we value." (Ed Elson, [28:01])

---

Tone and Style

• No Mercy, No Malice: The hosts challenge surface-level business explanations, interrogate tech industry logic, and use sharp, humorous asides.
• Directness: Examples include the critique of OnlyFans as a symptom of widespread loneliness and the candid analysis of the spectacle-driven AI chip policy shifts.
• Expert Guests: Provide nuanced, candid, and (sometimes) blunt insider perspectives.

---

Summary

• U.S.-China AI Race: The U.S. has abruptly reversed course, allowing Nvidia's powerful AI chips into China, potentially trading away its critical hardware edge for short-term corporate and personal gains—a decision likely shaped more by relationships than by a principled national security calculus.
• Smart Glasses Reboot: Google is rebooting smart glasses, betting AI will make heads-up computing useful and socially acceptable. Still, real mainstream adoption may take years, and only the market will decide if this wave will outlast the last.
• OnlyFans as Economic Mirror: Surging spending on OnlyFans signals a deeper societal malaise—atomization, loneliness, and the rise of monetized fake intimacy—showing how business stats shine a light on what is truly ailing modern culture.

This episode delivers a sharp, context-rich breakdown of two industry-defining stories and argues that both money and technology are mirrors of our times—sometimes reflecting things we’d rather not see.

Transcript

[Advertiser/Host]

Support for this show comes from Strawberry Me. Be honest. Are you happy with your job? Or are you stuck in one you've outgrown or never wanted in the first place? Sure, you can probably list the reasons for staying, but are they actually just excuses for not leaving? Let a career coach from Strawberry Me help you get unstuck. Discover the benefits of having a dedicated career coach in your corner. Go to Strawberry Me Unstuck to claim a special offer. AI agents are getting pretty impressive. You might not even realize you're listening to one right now. We work 247 to resolve customer inquiries. No hold music. No canned answers. No frustration. Visit Sierra AI to learn more.

[Alex Heath]

The world is buzzing with AI tools.

[Chris McGuire]

But instead of making things easier, they've made things overwhelming.

[Alex Heath]

There's a better way.

[Chris McGuire]

Enter Superhuman, the AI productivity suite that gives you superpowers so you can outsmart the work chaos with Grammarly mail and coda. Working together, you get proactive help across your workflow experience. AI that meets you right where you are.

[Alex Heath]

Unleash your superhuman potential today.

[Chris McGuire]

Learn [e-mail] podcast that's superhuman.com podcast.

[Ed Elson]

Today's number 75. That is the percentage of top grossing movies that are now sequels and reboots. That number is up from 25% in 2000. More proof that Hollywood's greatest special effect is copy and paste.

[Alex Heath]

Money market matters.

[Ed Elson]

If money is evil, then that building is hell.

[Chris McGuire]

The show goes on.

[Ed Elson]

Sell Sell. Welcome to Property Markets. I'm Ed elson. It is December 10th. Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals. The major indices were muted ahead of the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision due today. Notably, the Russell 2000 hit an all time high. Meanwhile, the yield on 10 year treasuries was stable. So was the dollar. Bitcoin rose and finally news broke in after hours trading that SpaceX is pursuing an IPO in 2026. According to reports, the company is raise more than $30 billion. That would make it the biggest listing ever.

Okay, what else is happening? In a sharp turn for US AI policy, the US is greenlighting advanced chip sales to China. President Trump has announced that Nvidia can sell its H200 chips to China in exchange for a 25% cut for the US government. He claims that President Xi Jinping, quote, responded positively to the proposal. Nvidia Stock climbed around 2% in response. However, after that announcement, the Financial Times reported that Beijing is already moving to limit access to those chips by Tuesday morning. Nvidia gave back those gains and closed in the red. Okay, here to discuss what is going on Here with these H2 hundreds and our AI chip policy, we are speaking with Chris McGuire, Senior Fellow for China and Emerging Technologies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Chris, thank you for joining us on Prof. G Markets.

[Chris McGuire]

Yeah, of course. Thanks for having me, Ed.

[Ed Elson]

So we've gotten this announcement from the president. Nvidia can now sell H200 chips to China.

But this is the next development in a story that seems to keep on going in multiple different directions. First it was that we can't sell the chips. Now we can, then we can't, now we can. What is the timeline here? What has actually happened and how has this news changed our policy on whether the US can or cannot send chips to China?

[Chris McGuire]

Yeah, that's a good question. I'll just walk through quickly the history here. So it was starting in October 2022, the United States first implemented policies to say the most advanced AI chips that were actually drawn line, the A100, the level below this one, the previous generation. Anything more advanced than that cannot be advanced to China, cannot be sold to China. The policy at the time was to maintain as large of a lead as possible over China. And there are basically two prongs to that. One was maximally slowing China down in AI and the other one was maximally investing at home. So that has been the policy. There's been various kind of ways to tighten it and close loopholes over the years. But the other prominent one is at the beginning, the Trump administration, Nvidia consistently made chips that just worked around and the Trump administration, it in April of this year kind of closed all loopholes, said NBA can't be in the China market.

But then quickly reversed that policy and allowed the H20, which was a much less advanced chip, to be sold to China. Now they are taking a much more significant step to say that the H200 can be sold to China, which is the first chip that is, that is over all of the original thresholds. This is the first time that we're really exporting AI chips that are, that are far greater than the intent of the controls. And that really would provide a pretty substantial plus up in China's compute capability. It's six times better than the H20. It's nine times over the export control limits. So even though it's the previous generation chip, it's not the Blackwell chip that's the most advanced. It's still a very, very capable chip and it's by far the most chip, most capable chip ever sent to China. So that's kind of a timeline here of how all this has played out. Obviously, big questions about what does this mean in the future, but also kind of why does this matter and what are the implic that we can talk through.

[Ed Elson]

Yeah, I appreciate that. Timeline sounds like under Biden we had restrictions, but looser restrictions. Then we tightened a lot. Then we slightly loosened. Now we're slightly loosening again. I guess my question is why? Why are we now loosening a little bit more? What was the impetus for this?

[Chris McGuire]

Yeah, I think actually all the changes before now were more on the margins. The big changes, I think, were October 2022, when the United States first implement controls, and it first said AI chips to China are going to be banned. And then the action yesterday where we said, actually we are willing to export advanced AI chips to China. So those are like the real bookends. Everything else in the middle, I think is more the kind of details of the story. The rationale of the control was because large numbers of advanced chips are necessary to make advanced AI models and China cannot make advanced chips themselves. This is a significant advantage the United States has over China and AI. It's probably the only significant advantage the United States has over China and AI. I think on talent, algorithms, data, electricity generation, applications. It's either a watch or China's ahead, but hardware is the area where we are very ahead. There actually has been pretty significant bipartisan support for this policy historically, but Jensen Huang has argued very vehemently, particularly over both administrations, but particularly effectively in this administration, to lessen those policies. Valid question as to why. I think the. From Nvidia's perspective, they definitely want to have a more diverse customer base. They have three, I think three companies probably, I think, make up 50% of their revenue. That poses a understandable strategic issue for anyone who leads a business. So they want to be able to sell to more providers, but that probably necessitates them selling to China. Up until now, the US Government has said that's not in the US national interest. That might be in Nvidia's interest, but we think that's going to materially advance China's AI capabilities, which poses national security threats, and therefore we're not going to let it happen. I think that President Trump has deciding this, has upended that and is basically saying whatever is good for Nvidia is good for America. Personally, I think Nvidia is a fantastic company that produces amazing products, that's doing great things, but I think that probably wouldn't make us blanket a statement. Personally.

[Ed Elson]

Yeah, I Guess that's the part that is interesting, is that it seemed that this was all about national security. We can't do it. We can't sell our chips to China. It's too important, it's too dangerous. And now we're deciding, yes, we can do it. And I guess the thing that is confusing as a viewer, as an observer from the administration is why, why now is it that Jensen is now buddies with the administration? That's certainly what it begins to look like when we see all these dinners. And maybe we're being, I don't know, too, too blunt there, but that's certainly what it appears. I mean, what is it do we think? Why is the administration deciding that this national security concern, which seemed like such a big deal, is no longer as big of a deal?

[Chris McGuire]

I think it's a very good question. And I do think the answer to why this happened is it came down to personal relationships. And I think Jensen Huang has convinced the President that this is a good thing. I think there are many people in D.C. on Capitol Hill, in the administration who are very skeptical of this, who do not believe that we should be sending China our most advanced technologies and have concerns about how China can use AI in the military and defense and espionage realms to undermine US national security has active plans to do so. So I think, look, there are other arguments that people make for exporting the chips. They'll tell you, well, if we don't export them, Huawei will fill the vacuum. I think that one I disagree with because actually, if you look at the US Nvidia and Huawei's AI chip roadmaps, Nvidia's chips are getting substantially better. They are already five times better. And in two years they're going to get to about 20 times better. China's chip making capability is very constrained. It is the one thing that they can't make really, well, sophisticated AI chips. They're the most complicated thing to make in the world. So I don't think they'll fill the gap. The idea that we could get China addicted to US Chips. I also just don't think there's been any technology where China has ever accepted being reliant on a foreign power. Particularly, they have been adamant not to be reliant on the United States, in particular on semiconductors. So I don't think there's any putting the toothpaste back in the tube on this. So, look, there are arguments, but I personally think, don't think they carry as much water or worn out by the history of the data I think the reason is because personal relationships have pushed big policy decisions across the line.

[Ed Elson]

Yeah, it is very interesting just from a national security what is best for America perspective, where on the one hand it's, well, we don't want to be giving China chips to advance their AI efforts. And then on the other hand, well, do we like that we have this leverage? Do we like the fact that they are so dependent on us? And I think what is very interesting is this more recent report that we heard from the Financial Times, which is that Beijing, Xi Jinping, China is actually actively limiting how many of these H200 chips their own companies can buy. So in other words, they're saying we actually don't want to buy them. We're going to try to restrict ourselves. We're going to cut ourselves off from this. What do you make of that report?

[Chris McGuire]

Yeah, that is very interesting. And we've seen this play out multiple times over the last few months. I mean, when the United States initially allowed the H20 so the kind of less good AI chip to go to China, China has blocked that. And I think that was in my opinion, very likely a negotiating ploy. I think they were trying to push for the more advanced chip and that ploy worked. I do think there is an element here where China is trying to make sure that they protect their own market. Right. They are trying to make AI chips. Huawei is making AI chips. They're not near nearly as good. They're not making nearly as many, but they are trying to do it. And China will make sure those chips get sold. They're not going to let those chips get unsold and just stuck in warehouses. So they will manipulate their domestic market to say, hey, these are the things that we need to use domestic chips for and make sure that the Huawei chips can continue to all get sold and be used. And that will be the case no matter how many chips they make. But yeah, the question of whether or not they actually, I'm sure they do have concerns about like backdoors and security, but whether or not they would actually be willing to forego the very substantial plus ups in compute capability that sending H200 would represent.

I'm a little more skeptical. But, you know, countries make silly decisions all the time. So I don't know.

[Ed Elson]

Chris McGuire, senior fellow for China and Emerging Technologies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Chris, this is fascinating stuff. Thank you for joining us.

[Chris McGuire]

Thanks very much for having me, Ed.

[Ed Elson]

After the break, Google's next product, smart glasses. If you're enjoying the show, give Profit markets A follow.

Support for the show comes from Vanguard. To all the financial advisors listening, let's talk about bonds for a minute. Capturing value and fixed income is not easy. Bond markets can be massive, murky. And let's be real, a lot of firms throw a couple flashy funds your way and call it a day. But not Vanguard. Vanguard's been in the game a long time and their scale gives them a serious edge. They're able to invest across all kinds of sectors, maturities and geographies. Which means they can spot and act on opportunities that others might miss. Some managed out there promise big returns, but those usually come with big risk risks. And that can mean a roller coaster ride for investors. Vanguard takes a steadier approach. It's not always flashy, but it sets the standard for what dependable investing should look like. So if you're looking to give your clients consistent results year in and year out, go see the record for [e-mail] audio. That's vanguard.com audio all investing is subject to risk. Vanguard Marketing Corporation Distributor.

[Alex Heath]

Support for the.

[Public.com Advertiser]

Show comes from public.com you're thoughtful about where your money goes. You've got your core holdings, some high conviction picks, maybe even a few strategic option plays on the side. The point is you've engaged with your investments and public gets that. That's why they built an investing platform for those who take it seriously. On public you can put together a multi asset portfolio for the long haul. Stocks, bonds, options, it's all there. Plus an industry leading 3.8% APY high yield cash account out Switch to the platform built for those who take investing seriously. Go to public.comproPG and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.comproPG paid for by Public Investing. All investing involves the risk of loss including loss of principal. Brokerage services for U.S. listed registered securities options and bonds in a self directed account are offered by Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC. Complete disclosure available at public.com disclosures.

[Ed Elson]

Zoe, the mall's about to close. It's impossible to do anything in 15 minutes.

[Advertiser/Host]

Oh, it's possible, Harvey. I mean, you can switch to T mobile in just 15 minutes. So you think you can find your auntie a sweater? Come on, you spent an hour buying jelly beans.

[Ed Elson]

I know.

[Advertiser/Host]

I do love jelly beans. Trust me. Now you can switch to T mobile in just 15 minutes. Plus you'll get America's Best Network. No, Steve, no.

[Ed Elson]

15.

[Advertiser/Host]

Maybe I should switch to T mobile right now. This Holiday.

[Ed Elson]

Switch to T mobile in just 15 minutes from your phone. Check out in 15 minutes or less per line. T Mobile is the best mobile network in the US based on analysis by ookl of speed test intelligence data. 1h 2025.

We'Re back with Prof. G Markets. Google is taking another swing at smart glasses and this time it is betting that AI will make the difference. More than a decade after the Google Glass, the company has announced plans to launch AI powered glasses in 2026. It is creating an audio only model that lets users speak directly with Gemini. It's also working on a version with an in lens display capable of showing navigation prompts and real time translation. The hardware will be developed through partnerships with Samsung, Gentle Monster and Warby Parker. So here to help us unpack what this announcement means for Google and smart glasses and wearables at large, we are speaking with Alex Heath, author of the Sources newsletter and co host of the Access podcast. Alex, good to see you.

[Alex Heath]

Good to see you, man.

[Ed Elson]

So these smart glasses, I think the first question is Google already did it. We had the Google Glass, it was the first example of smart glasses. Then they stopped doing it because it was a dramatic failure. Now they're doing it again. What's changed here?

[Alex Heath]

I think the short answer is AI. I think they see a huge opportunity and I've talked to their leadership there about this to build Google for your face, which honestly is a pretty compelling idea. A lot of them inside Google are also obsessed with this idea of super memory, of having all your googly context which is for a lot of people, it's their work, it's their documents, it's their email, it's their calendar, it's maps, it's all these touch points. Google has like over a dozen products with over 2 billion users I think. So all these touch points with Gemini as like the orchestrator in a heads up kind of on your face. Seeing the world and understanding it. Product is a super compelling idea and that just didn't exist when Glass came out. I mean AI was but a twinkle in everyone's eye. And.

Society has also gotten to a point where people see the metaglasses out and about. There's all these AI wearables. Sam and Johnny are doing their thing and there's just this growing, I think social acceptance of wearables and AI and I think the timing for them feels good and it doesn't hurt that, you know, Meta is seeing early sales traction with the Ray Ban partnership starting to actually sell, you know, millions of units a year. Those Kind of numbers will get anyone who is a potential competitor interested in the space.

[Ed Elson]

Do we know anything about what they will look like or how they will work? Do we have any specs out?

[Alex Heath]

Yeah. So they're adopting the Meta approach and it's actually the Android approach. I do think they kind of, you could map this to how they've approached Android where they work with a ton of OEMs and in this case the initial products are going to be in partnership with Warby Parker Gentle Monster, which is a huge eyewear brand in Asia, some others. And then I do think we will see. I don't know if they're going to call it Glass per se. That would be pretty ballsy. I think they should, I've told them that. But we will see a first party Google experience too in the same way that Google has Pixel. But then Android is everywhere and Samsung sells the most Androids. They really want this platform, this Gemini AR software platform to be the bet and to be everywhere, which is a real assault on Meta's strategy. Luckily Meta has the LSOR luxottica partnership but Google is going for all the others and then that just leaves Apple with a fully classic Apple vertically integrated approach. And I expect to see the Apple glasses in a couple years.

[Ed Elson]

It's so interesting to see how this market has evolved over time in Silicon Valley because we had one era where everyone thought glasses were the next thing and we saw the Google Glass, we saw the Snap spectacles, we've even seen the Vision Pro, we've seen what's happened with the headsets and all of that. Then it seems to get put to bed and people seem to say okay, this isn't going to happen. Now it's back. And I wonder why it's back. Is it, I mean you mentioned AI is playing a piece of this. Is it that Meta also proved that it can work. Yeah, if, I guess they look good.

[Alex Heath]

Yeah, if they look good. I think, you know, people in tech don't understand this basic concept of like people don't want to wear ugly things. And I think for a long time it was really hard to get through everyone's head that like, like the bar to putting something on you with technology is just super, super high. It's not like a phone, it's not like trying a foldable or something. And Meta finally cracked that with Ray Ban and Elisor Lixotica and a product that's not bad. You know, it's not amazing. The AI is not really what people use it for, but for taking photos for listening to podcasts, all that stuff. It's a good product and it looks like glasses and you can't really tell the difference. And that is the bar. So showing that and then seeing the early sales traction. Yes, I think that kind of quote unquote validates the space. I mean, man, I've been reporting on air glasses for like a decade and they were kind of the original AI in the sense of like all these founders all the way up from like Zuck down to Evan Spiegel would talk about this thing as the next major platform that's going to change everything and re architect how we use technology. And AI ended up kind of being that thing right in the last few years. And now I think everyone who's been, you know, the builders in Silicon Valley who've been obsessed with aero glasses as a replacement for the phone are finally going like, oh, AI now supercharges this and we have a path to making this socially acceptable.

[Ed Elson]

Just looking at Wall Street's reaction, we didn't really see any, any reaction in the stock. We did see a huge reaction in Warby Parker stock, up 24%. I mean, you know, this is a far smaller company, so that's why we're seeing that.

[Alex Heath]

But what's crazy to me, because this Warby Parker thing was this is over a year old. Like, they announced they were doing something with Warby Parker, I think in the spring. Yeah, I just. It seems a little twitchy to me.

[Ed Elson]

Y. What do you make of Wall Street's reaction overall? I mean, just on the Google side, Wall street doesn't seem to care that much about this. They're certainly not really pricing this in. If this is going to be the next frontier, the next platform. Investors don't seem to believe it or take it seriously yet.

[Alex Heath]

It's too uncertain. I mean, the timelines are uncertain. Everyone would tell you, they'd tell me in interviews that AR glasses are right around the corner. They're just going to be in three years. And they've been saying that for the last 10 years. So it's just a platform that has constant delayed. So I'm not surprised by the reaction, or lack of with Google. But it's an AI story, Right. There's Gemini involved. So if any Gemini is going to touch your stock as a smaller company, you're going to get that bubble pop that you talk about so much on this show. Yeah, those kind of stock reactions are the bubble ad. I mean, let's be honest, like that, that this announcement does not warrant a 24% jump in Warby Parker stock. Like, I am not a stock analyst, but I just know the. I know, I know facts and I know just like reality and it's ridiculous. And so I think just everyone is so twitchy about AI. And if you can say you're aligning with who is seen right now as kind of objectively the category leader in AI Google, of course you're going to get that pop. It doesn't mean it's here to stay, but you'll get it.

[Ed Elson]

Just as someone who's covered this stuff and studied these technologies for a long time, what do you think of AI glasses and smart glasses? Do you think that they are the future? Will we be walking around interacting with screens in front of our eyes?

[Alex Heath]

I always have. I've loved the idea of it, the sci fi idea of it, and I've used so many prototypes over the years. Some are good, some are bad. Did you get to use the meta displays that they just teased or I guess released a few months ago?

[Ed Elson]

No, I've tried on the Ray Bans and taken some photos and played music, but I've got them.

[Alex Heath]

Those, those are a genuinely wow moment. When you do the demo, they're not like a product in the sense that they're ready to be like worn all day and used all day and the AI is not quite there. But when you see the interaction modality, the way it like, feels, the like kind of aha of like, oh, getting this context in my vision, it's just like obvious. It's just obvious, man, that this is where it's going because it's just so much more natural. It's just a natural way to use technology. Again, it doesn't look natural right now and it's clunky and like they've got to iron the bugs out and there's a lot of those. I'm not actually of the opinion that a lot of other, I would say, like armchair experts are that like, there's all these fundamental breakthroughs that need to happen for AR glasses to be mainstream. I actually do think it's kind of inevitable at this point when you use the meta displays. It's like, wow, they've got a couple years of iterating on this and this is a pretty compelling product, products. Whereas before it was like, they keep saying it's a couple years out, but who knows? I haven't been able to take anything home. And so that was a big moment. And I think we'll have a couple of those in the next couple years with Google and Apple. But again, the phone is safe. It's never going to go away. And I don't even know if it's going to be meaningfully disrupted within five years. If you're trying to short Apple over this, I wouldn't. But I do think it's inevitable just because of the natural use of it just on Apple.

[Ed Elson]

I mean, the implications here is that this will ultimately disrupt the phone in some way. Maybe it won't replace it, but it will certainly change the way we interact with technology. Apple's got the headset, they've got the Vision Pro. They're now scaling that back because it's been kind of a flop. Are they working on glasses? Do we know if they are going to do glasses?

[Alex Heath]

Yes, they are. I and others are hearing 2027ish, maybe 28 for V1. Notably, Meta just hired Alan Dye, Apple's head of design, who oversaw Vision OS and obviously was intimately familiar with the glasses roadmap and decided to leave Apple before that roadmap was shipped. So that, I think says something, doesn't it?

[Ed Elson]

Yeah, well, this glasses race is something we will continue to cover. Alex Heath, author of the Sources newsletter and co host of the Access podcast. Always good to see you. Thanks, Alex.

[Alex Heath]

Always good. Thanks, Ed.

[Ed Elson]

A new report on OnlyFans just came out and it takes a look at how much people actually spent on the platform in 2025. It also breaks down down these numbers by region. So we got a picture of not only how addicted the world is to OnlyFans, but also which countries are most addicted to OnlyFans. As a reminder for those who don't know, OnlyFans is a creator platform, but it might as well be called a porn platform. The way it works is people, primarily young women, post sexual and illicit content in exchange for money. And unlike, unlike regular porn sites, which are primarily driven by ads, this is a subscription driven business. So primarily young men will pay a monthly subscription to get access to videos and images of primarily young women. Again, little heteronormative, but that is generally what is happening on the platform. Okay, so let's get to the report. How much did people spend on OnlyFans in 2025? What? Well, by country. In France, people spent $237 million. In Mexico, people spent $291 million. In Canada, people spent $355 million. In the UK people spent $531 million. But the number one spender in the world was indeed the United States, which spent on OnlyFans again in 2025, $2.6 billion. So that is more money than this nation spends on socks or on toothpaste or on phone charges. It is also more money than our government spends on all of American Public Media. 2.6 billion. That's how much we spent on OnlyFans. Now, there's a reason that business news is important to us. It's not just that it's entertaining. It's not just that it impacts our portfolios and impacts stocks. But sometimes it can also provide something of a window into what is actually happening at the societal level. People can say things, they can write stories, they can go on Instagram and TV and tell you, this is what's happening in the world, world. But money talks for itself. It isn't biased, it's neutral. It is a true reflection of who we are, what we care about and what we value. And so I will tell you this statistic again. Americans spent in 2025, $2.6 billion on OnlyFans. Now, if that doesn't tell us what is wrong with our society right now, I don't know what does. As I've said on the show before, it's not just that this is porn. Porn has been around for a long time. Porn isn't new. But what is new with OnlyFans is the monetization and the commodification of what is a fake relationship with a person. It's the fact that young Americans are paying literally billions of dollars a year not just to look at naked women on the Intern, they can do that on pornhub for free, but to engage in what they believe is an intimate and private relationship with a woman who in reality has no idea who they are and who, more importantly, doesn't give a fuck about them. It is literally a business. Now. It's something close to prostitution, but not quite, because it's also scratching this emotional itch. It's filling this void that exists, exists not just when you don't have sex, but also when you don't have companionship, when you don't have friends, when you don't have love. And this is how bad the loneliness problem has gotten. It has literally become a multi billion dollar industry and it is ruining the lives of young men literally by the millions. And that's not hyperbole. There are nearly 400 million users on OnlyFans today. Almost all of them are made men.

So we will continue to track this. I don't see any evidence that the business is going to slow down. And if I had to make a bet My bet would be that OnlyFans continues to crush it in 2026. But let's be clear. This is about as close to the downfall of society as we are going to get. We went from Playboy to Hustler to Pornhub and now OnlyFans. And from what I've read, people were very concerned about those businesses throughout history. But I do believe we are beginning to approach the end game here. And I don't think that there is one company in the world that says more about what is wrong with society and what is wrong with young men in particular than OnlyFans.

Okay, that's it for today. This episode was produced by Claire Miller, edited by Joel Patterson and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our associate producer is Alison Weiss. Our research team is Dan Shalon, Isabella Kinsel, Kristen o' Donoghue and Mia Silverio. And our technical director is Drew Burrows. Thank you for listening to Prof. G Markets from Prof. G Media. If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Ed Elson. I'll see you tomorrow.

[Advertiser/Host]

Saks Fifth Avenue makes it easy to holiday your way. Whether it's finding the right gift or the right outfit, Saks is where you can find everything from the perfect Chloe bag for your hard to shop for a sister to a Prada jacket for a fancy holiday dinner. And if you don't know where to start, Saks.com is customized to your personal style so you can save time shopping. Make shopping fun and easy this season and find gifts and inspiration to suit your holiday style at Saks Fifth Avenue.